Perineural local anaesthetic catheter after major lower limb amputation trial (PLACEMENT): results from a randomised controlled feasibility trial

Bosanquet, David, Ambler, Graeme, Waldron, Cherry-Ann ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8465-2492, Thomas-Jones, Emma, Brookes-Howell, Lucy ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8263-7130, Kelson, Mark, Pickles, Timothy ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7743-0234, Harris, Debbie ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7073-7724, Milosevic, Sarah ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1973-8286, Fitzsimmons, Deborah, Saxena, Neeraj ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0913-9351 and Twine, Christopher ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0385-5760 2019. Perineural local anaesthetic catheter after major lower limb amputation trial (PLACEMENT): results from a randomised controlled feasibility trial. BMJ Open 9 (11) , e029233. 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029233

Preview

PDF - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial. Download (866kB) | Preview

Abstract

Objectives To determine the feasibility of undertaking a randomised controlled effectiveness trial evaluating the use of a perineural catheter (PNC) after major lower limb amputation with postoperative pain as the primary outcome. Design Randomised controlled feasibility trial. Setting Two vascular Centres in South Wales, UK. Participants 50 patients scheduled for major lower limb amputation (below or above knee) for complications of peripheral vascular disease. Interventions The treatment arm received a PNC placed adjacent to the sciatic or tibial nerve at the time of surgery, with continuous infusion of levobupivacaine hydrochloride 0.125% for up to 5 days. The control arm received neither local anaesthetic nor PNC. Both arms received usual perioperative anaesthesia and postoperative analgesia. Primary and secondary outcome measures The primary outcomes were the proportion of eligible patients who were randomised and the proportion of recruited patients who provided primary effectiveness outcome data. Secondary outcomes were: the proportion of recruited patients reaching 2 and 6 month follow-up and supplying pain data; identification of key cost drivers; development of an economic analysis framework for a future effectiveness trial; identification of barriers to recruitment and site set-up; and identification of the best way to measure postoperative pain. Results Seventy-six of 103 screened patients were deemed eligible over a 10 month period. Fifty (64.5%) of these patients were randomised, with one excluded in the perioperative period. Forty-five (91.3%) of 49 recruited patients provided enough pain scores on a 4-point verbal rating scale to allow primary effectiveness outcome evaluation. Attrition rates were high; 18 patients supplied data at 6 month follow-up. Costs were dominated by length of hospital stay. Patients and healthcare professionals reported that trial processes were acceptable. Conclusions Recruitment of patients into a trial comparing PNC use to usual care after major lower limb amputation with postoperative pain measured on a 4-point verbal rating scale is feasible. Evaluation of longer-term symptoms is difficult.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Medicine Centre for Trials Research (CNTRR) Cardiff University Brain Research Imaging Centre (CUBRIC)
Publisher:	BMJ Publishing Group
ISSN:	2044-6055
Date of First Compliant Deposit:	3 January 2020
Date of Acceptance:	16 October 2019
Last Modified:	11 Oct 2023 21:21
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/128156

Citation Data

Cited 5 times in Scopus. View in Scopus. Powered By Scopus® Data

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item